E.GNANASEKAR Vs. COMMISSIONER AND SPECIAL OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These writ petitions are filed against the orders of punishment dtd. 30/6/2021 and 13/9/2021, in and by which, the respondent ordered for recovery of a sum of Rs.7,85,679.00 and Rs.3,14,979.00.

(2.) The petitioners were slapped with a charge memo dtd. 24/4/2006, alleging that while they were working as Junior Assistant, they failed to collect rent from the lessees and thereby caused loss of Rs.92,49,537.00 to the Exchequer of the erstwhile Thoothukudi Municipality. They also submitted their explanation to the respondent denying all the charges. Thereafter, an enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer submitted his enquiry report, by holding that among six charges, five charges are not proved and one charge alone is partly proved. Instead of taking decision on the enquiry report submitted by the Enquiry Officer, the Disciplinary Authority, vide his proceedings dtd. 13/3/2018, ordered for re-enquiry by appointing another Enquiry Officer. The same was under challenge in W.P.(MD)No.674 of 2019. This Court, vide order dtd. 26/2/2021, allowed the writ petition by setting aside the charge memo dtd. 24/4/2006 and the consequential proceedings of re-enquiry dtd. 13/3/2018. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent Corporation filed an appeal in Writ Appeal (MD) No.882 of 2021 before this Court. A Division Bench of this Court, vide Judgment dtd. 23/4/2021, partly allowed by setting aside the proceedings of re-enquiry dtd. 13/3/2018 and granted liberty to the disciplinary authority to proceed with the enquiry report dtd. 28/5/2013 and to pass a fresh order. Accordingly, the impugned orders have been passed. Aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is filed.

(3.) Since the issue involved in both the writ petitions are one and the same, both the writ petitions are taken up together for final disposal.